The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1887-08-24

- session n nearing testimony IL
leDattai OF the defendants application fo-
= = con uance, the effort on the part of fhs
o1ate being to satisfy the court that If the
-, witnesses, Andrew Govan and Ike
t Anolliass we're present, they would not
would f-''S1 ''
As to the absent Tom HARDY the STAT
proved that the defense had been advises
that Hardy could be gotten al anv time
and the defense explained that his name
was inserted in the affidavit because the
same assurances we're given during the
haoeas corpus trial, and he failed to come
ana avoided the process of the court
he question of Ike Thomas 4estimopv.
another witness referred to, it being
clatmed that he would swear that he saw
uatnoreI standing on the bridge. This
was denied and it was claimed that the
witness swore on the habeas corpus trial
mat the man he saw on the bridge was not
Eubank, because he did not have side whis
kers.
Rev j. B. Gambreu was sworn and testi-
ned that at the time of the killing Eubank
nad side EhIskers very much like his son
z. ID. Gambreu.
Loue Thomas and w. A. White were
then sworn and testified that Eubauk's
whlskers were not near so long or heavy
as r. ID. Gambrell's, and Gambrell's photo
was produced as evidence.
The whole afternoon session of the court
was consumed IN arguing the defendant
application for a continuance. Judge
Calhoon opened for the defense and was
followed by G. H. Alexander and Colonel
Huddleston for the State, the argument
being closed by Colonel Nugent, as on a
motion of this kind the defendants were
entitled to the last speech.
All the speeches were earnest and able:
the law II the case and issue of fact as to
what the witnesses would swear to being
thoroughly discussed. Numerous prece-
dents were cited and discussed on both
sides, which it was claimed had a bearing
IN this instance.
Judge Mayors said in substance that upon
the showing presented by the defendants
they were entitled to continuance. and
without giving any reason for his decision
he would cause such and order TO be made
upon the minutes of the court
just here the State proposed to admit
that the absent witnesses if here would
swear IN the manner claimed in defendants
petition and upon this admission that the
iafproceed.
Aften>some discussion the court ruled
that unlese>the defendants agreed to 20 to
trial in the absence of these witnesses the
case would stand continued, as they were
entitled to have the personal attendance of
or compulsory process to bring them. The
defendants claiming this right, the case
stands continued till the next term of court
here, which will be in February.
The prisoners were remanded to the
Kinds county jail and ordered to be taken
back on Tuesday next.
These proceedings only applied to Ham
ilton and Eubank, who are Jointly in licted
but it was agreed that the same orders be
made in the case of Albrecht who Is in
dicted separately, and they were so written
up.
As to the matter of new application
for bail, of which nothing has as yet been
said in court, the opinion of the lawyers
for the State is that there is nothing left
for the defendants to do but to remain in
Jail until the next term, unless they prose
cue the appeal from Chancellor Peyton's
decision to the Supreme Court, and that in
case of a reversal of Judge Peyton's decis-
ion denying bail, it would not admit defen-
dants to bail, but would give them the
right to sue out another writ of habeas
corpus to relieve them of the indictment
10y the grand jury, which right they cannot
possess unless the appeal from Judge Pey-
toms decision is reversed.
In the above statement of the case as tC
the bail matter, is not included the pris
oner's right to apply for it on the ground
of dangerous illness, if such contingency
should arise, as provided for by law. The
counsel for defense combat this theory,
and contend the indictment of defendants
makes a new case so far as the right Of
habeas corpus is concerned; that they are
not req uired to prosecute and reverse
Judge Peyton's decision; that they have G
right to sue out a new writ; that no law
would require them to prosecute an appeal
from which there could be no tangible
result.
After adjournment of the court a con,
ference of defendant and his attorneys
was at once held. A writ of habeas corpus
was prepared and viii be presented doubt
less tonight to Judge Mayors, and the date
for hearing will likely be fixed for some
day next week.
The most startling statement made dur
ing the argument was by Colonel Nugen1
who stated that il was with regret that thu
defense had been compelled TO abandon
the theory that it was an accidental meet
ing between Hamilton and Gambren OF
the bridge.
There was an immense crowd present al
day, among them many ladies. judge
Mayors DECISION as to the continuance was
quietly received, no demonstration being
made by either side.
IAATER-The writ of habeas sued out to
night for another application for bail 70
Hamilton, Albrecht and Eubank was pre-
scented to Judge Mayors tonight, VIII
granted the same and made it returnabl
before Chief Justice L. Z. Cooper at Jack
son on Monday, the 2sth day of August.